GIFT  OF 


8061'IZWIH 
*A  'M  ' 


The  Evolution  of  the  Scientific  Investigator 


OPENING  ADDRESS 

AT  THE 

International  Congress  of  Arts  and  Science 

AT  THE 

Universal  Exposition,  St.  Louis 
September  1  9,  1  904 

By 
SIMON   NEWCOMB 


UNIVERSAL  EXPOSITION,   ST.    LOUIS, 
1904 


The  Evolution  of  the  Scientific  Investigator 


OPENING  ADDRESS 

AT  THE 

International  Congress  of  Arts  and  Science 

AT  THE 

Universal  Exposition,  St.  Louis 
September  19,  1904 


By 
SIMON   NEWCOMB 


UNIVERSAL  EXPOSITION,    ST.    LOUIS, 
1904 


\ 


•l.*':-..'  ':;...  •/•*•. 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  SCIENTIFIC 
INVESTIGATOR. 


As  we  look  at  the  assemblage  gathered  in  this 
hall,  comprising  so  many  names  of  widest  renown 
in  every  branch  of  learning — we  might  almost  say 
in  every  field  of  human  endeavor — the  first  inquiry 
suggested  must  be  after  the  object  of  our  meeting. 
The  answer  is  that  our  purpose  corresponds  to  the 
eminence  of  the  assemblage.  We  aim  at  nothing 
less  than  a  survey  of  the  realm  of  knowledge,  as 
comprehensive  as  is  permitted  by  the  limitations  of 
time  and  space.  The  organizers  of  our  congress 
have  honored  me  with  the  charge  of  presenting  such 
preliminary  view  of  its  field  as  may  make  clear  the 
spirit  of  our  undertaking. 

Certain  tendencies  characteristic  of  the  science 
of  our  day  clearly  suggest  the  direction  of  our  thoughts 
most  appropriate  to  the  occasion.  Among  the 
strongest  of  these  is  one  toward  laying  greater  stress 
on  questions  of  the  beginning  of  things,  and  regarding 
a  knowledge  of  the  laws  of  development  of  any  object  of 
study  as  necessary  to  the  understanding  of  its  present 
form.  It  may  be  conceded  that  the  principle  here 
involved  is  as  applicable  in  the  broad  field  before  us 
as  in  a  special  research  into  the  properties  of  the 
minutest  organism.  It  therefore  seems  meet  that 
we  should  begin  b}^  inquiring  what  agency  has 
brought  about  the  remarkable  development  of  science 

44203 


to  which  the  world  of  today  bears  witness.  This 
view  is  recognized  in  the  plan  of  our  proceed- 
ings by  providing  for  each  great  department  of 
knowledge  a  review  of  its  progress  during  the 
century  that  has  elapsed  since  the  great  event  com- 
memorated by  the  scenes  outside  this  hall.  But  such 
reviews  do  not  make  up  that  general  survey  of  science 
at  large  which  is  necessary  to  the  development  of  our 
theme,  and  which  must  include  the  action  of  causes  that 
had  their  origin  long  before  our  time.  The  movement 
which  culminated  in  making  the  nineteenth  century 
ever  memorable  in  history  is  the  outcome  of  a  long 
series  of  causes,  acting  through  many  centuries,  which 
are  worthy  of  especial  attention  on  such  an  occasion  as 
this.  In  setting  them  forth  we  should  avoid  laying 
stress  on  those  visible  manifestations  which,  striking 
the  eye  of  every  beholder,  are  in  no  danger  of  being 
overlooked,  and  search  rather  for  those  agencies  whose 
activities  underlie  the  whole  visible  scene,  but  which 
are  liable  to  be  blotted  out  of  sight  by  the  very  brilliancy 
of  the  results  to  which  they  have  given  rise.  It  is  easy 
to  draw  attention  to  the  wonderful  qualities  of  the  oak ; 
but,  from  that  very  fact,  it  may  be  needful  to  point  out 
that  the  real  wonder  lies  concealed  in  the  acorn  from 
which  it  grew. 

Our  inquiry  into  the  logical  order  of  the  causes 
which  have  made  our  civilization  what  it  is  today  will 
be  facilitated  by  bringing'  to  mind  certain  elementary 
considerations — ideas  so  familiar  that  setting  them  forth 
may  seem  like  citing  a  body  of  truisms — and  yet  so 
frequently  overlooked,  not  only  individually,  but  in 
their  relation  to  each  other,  that  the  conclusion  to 

4 


which  they  lead  may  be  lost  to  sight.  One  of  these 
propositions  is  that  psychical  rather  than  material 
causes  are  those  which  we  should  regard  as  funda- 
mental in  directing  the  development  of  the  social 
organism.  The  human  intellect  is  the  really  active 
agent  in  every  branch  of  endeavor — the  primum  mobile 
of  civilization — and  all  those  material  manifestations  to 
which  our  attention  is  so  often  directed  are  to  be 
regarded  as  secondary  to  this  first  agency.  If  it  be 
true  that  ' '  in  the  world  is  nothing  great  but  man ;  in 
man  is  nothing  great  but  mind,"  then  should  the  key- 
note of  our  discourse  be  the  recognition  of  this  first  and 
greatest  of  powers. 

Another  well-known  fact  is  that  those  applications 
of  the  forces  of  nature  to  the  promotion  of  human  wel- 
fare which  have  made  our  age  what  it  is  are  of  such 
comparatively  recent  origin  that  we  need  go  back  only 
a  single  century  to  antedate  their  most  important  feat- 
ures, and  scarcely  more  than  four  centuries  to  find 
their  beginning.  It  follows  that  the  subject  of  our 
inquiry  should  be  the  commencement,  not  many  cen- 
turies ago,  of  a  certain  new  form  of  intellectual 
activity. 

Having  gained  this  point  of  view,  our  next  inquiry 
will  be  into  the  nature  of  that  activity  and  its  relation 
to  the  stages  of  progress  which  preceded  and  followed 
its  beginning.  The  superficial  observer,  who  sees  the 
oak  but  forgets  the  acorn,  might  tell  us  that  the  special 
qualities  which  have  brought  out  such  great  results  are 
expert  scientific  knowledge  and  rare  ingenuity,  directed 
to  the.  application  of  the  powers  of  steam  and  elec- 
tricity. From  this  point  of  view  the  great  inventors 

5 


and  the  great  captains  of  industry  were  the  first  agents 
in  bringing  about  the  modern  era.  But  the  more  care- 
ful inquirer  will  see  that  the  work  of  these  men  was 
possible  only  through  a  knowledge  of  the  laws  of 
nature,  which  had  been  gained  by  men  whose  work 
took  precedence  of  theirs  in  logical  order,  and  that 
success  in  invention  has  been  measured  by  complete- 
ness in  such  knowledge.  While  giving  all  due  honor 
to  the  great  inventors,  let  us  remember  that  the  first 
place  is  that  of  the  great  investigators,  whose  forceful 
intellects  opened  the  way  to  secrets  previously  hidden 
from  men.  Let  it  be  an  honor  and  not  a  reproach  to 
these  men  that  they  were  not  actuated  by  the  love  of 
gain,  and  did  not  keep  utilitarian  ends  in  view  in  the 
pursuit  of  their  researches.  If  it  seems  that  in 
neglecting  such  ends  they  were  leaving  undone  the 
most  important  part  of  their  work,  let  us  remember 
that  nature  turns  a  forbidding  face  to  those  who  pay 
her  court  with  the  hope  of  gain,  and  is  responsive  only 
to  those  suitors  whose  love  for  her  is  pure  and  unde- 
filed.  Not  only  is  the  special  genius  required  in  the 
investigator  not  that  generally  best  adapted  to  applying 
the  discoveries  which  he  makes,  but  the  result  of  his 
having  sordid  ends  in  view  would  be  to  narrow  the 
field  of  his  efforts,  and  exercise  a  depressing  effect 
upon  his  activities.  The  true  man  of  science  has  no 
such  expression  in  his  vocabulary  as  '  *  useful  knowl- 
edge." His  domain  is  as  wide  as  nature  itself,  and  he 
best  fulfills  his  mission  when  he  leaves  to  others  the  task 
of  applying  the  knowledge  he  gives  to  the  world. 

We  have  here  the  explanation  of  the  well-known 
fact  that  the  functions  of  the  investigator  of  the  laws  of 

6 


nature,  and  of  the  inventor  who  applies  these  laws  to 
utilitarian  purposes,  are  rarely  united  in  the  same  per- 
son. If  the  one  conspicuous  exception  which  the  past 
century  presents  to  this  rule  is  not  unique,  we  should 
probably  have  to  go  back  to  Watt  to  find  another. 

From  this  viewpoint  it  is  clear  that  the  primary 
agent  in  the  movement  which  has  elevated  man  to  the 
masterful  position  he  now  occupies  is  the  scientific 
investigator.  He  it  is  whose  work  has  deprived  plague 
and  pestilence  of  their  terrors,  alleviated  human  suffer- 
ing, girdled  the  earth  with  the  electric  wire,  bound  the 
continent  with  the  iron  way,  and  made  neighbors  of  the 
most  distant  nations.  As  the  first  agent  which  has 
made  possible  this  meeting  of  his  representatives,  let  his 
evolution  be  this  day  our  worthy  theme.  As  we  follow 
the  evolution  of  an  organism  by  studying  the  stages  of 
its  growth,  so  we  have  to  show  how  the  work  of  the 
scientific  investigator  is  related  to  the  ineffectual  efforts 
of  his  predecessors. 

In  our  time  we  think  of  the  process  of  development 
in  nature  as  one  going  continuously  forward  through 
the  combination  of  the  opposite  processes  of  evolution 
and  dissolution.  The  tendency  of  our  thought  has 
been  in  the  direction  of  banishing  cataclysms  to  the 
theological  limbo,  and  viewing  nature  as  a  sleepless 
plodder,  endowed  with  infinite  patience,  waiting  through 
long  ages  for  results.  I  do  not  contest  the  truth  of 
the  principle  of  continuity  on  which  this  view  is  based. 
But  it  fails  to  make  known  to  us  the  whole  truth.  The 
building  of  a  ship  from  the  time  that  her  keel  is  laid 
until  she  is  making  her  way  across  the  ocean  is  a  slow 
and  gradual  process ;  yet  there  is  a  cataclysmic  epoch 

7 


opening  up  a  new  era  in  her  history.  It  is  tke  moment 
when,  after  lying  for  months  or  years  a  dead,  inert, 
immovable  mass,  she  is  suddenly  endowed  with  the 
power  of  motion,  and,  as  if  imbued  with  life,  glides  into 
the  stream,  eager  to  begin  the  career  for  which  she  was 
designed. 

I  think  it  is  thus  in  the  development  of  humanity. 
Long  ages  may  pass  during  which  a  race,  to  all  external 
observation,  appears  to  be  making  no  real  progress. 
Additions  may  be  made  to  learning,  and  the  records  of 
history  may  constantly  grow,  but  there  is  nothing  in 
its  sphere  of  thought,  or  in  the  features  of  its  life,  that 
can  be  called  essentially  new.  Yet,  nature  may  have 
been  all  along  slowly  working  in  a  way  which  evades 
our  scrutiny  until  the  result  of  her  operations  suddenly 
appears  in  a  new  and  revolutionary  movement,  carrying 
the  race  to  a  higher  plane  of  civilization. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  point  out  such  epochs  in  human 
progress.  The  greatest  of  all,  because  it  was  the  first, 
is  one  of  which  we  find  no  record  either  in  written  or 
geological  history.  It  was  the  epoch  when  our  pro- 
genitors first  took  conscious  thought  of  the  morrow, 
first  used  the  crude  weapons  which  nature  had  placed 
within  their  reach  to  kill  their  prey,  first  built  a  fire 
to  warm  their  bodies  and  cook  their  food.  I  love  to 
fancy  that  there  was  some  one  first  man,  the  Adam  of 
evolution,  who  did  all  this,  and  who  used  the  power 
thus  acquired  to  show  his  fellows  how  they  might 
profit  by  his  example.  When  the  members  of  the  tribe 
or  community  which  he  gathered  around  him  began 
to  conceive  of  life  as  a  whole — to  include  yesterda}', 
to-day  and  to-morrow  in  the  same  mental  grasp — to 


think  how  they  might  apply  the  gifts  of  nature  to 
their  own  uses — a  movement  was  begun  which  should 
ultimately  lead  to  civilization. 

Long  indeed  must  have  been  the  ages  required 
for  the  development  of  this  rudest  primitive  commun- 
ity into  the  civilization  revealed  to  us  by  the  most 
ancient  tablets  of  Egypt  and  Assyria.  After  spoken 
language  was  developed,  and  after  the  rude  represen- 
tation of  ideas  by  visible  marks  drawn  to  resemble  them 
had  long  been  practiced,  some  Cadmus  must  have 
invented  an  alphabet.  When  the  use  of  written  lan- 
guage was  thus  introduced,  the  word  of  command  ceased 
to  be  confined  to  the  range  of  the  human  voice,  and  it 
became  possible  for  master  minds  to  extend  their  influ- 
ence as  far  as  a  written  message  could  be  carried. 
Then  were  communities  gathered  into  provinces ;  prov- 
inces into  kingdoms ;  kingdoms  into  the  great  empires 
of  antiquity.  Then  arose  a  stage  of  civilization  which 
we  find  pictured  in  the  most  ancient  records — a  stage 
in  which  men  were  governed  by  laws  that  were  per- 
haps as  wisely  adapted  to  their  conditions  as  our  laws 
are  to  ours — in  which  the  phenomena  of  nature  were 
rudely  observed,  and  striking  occurrences  in  the  earth 
or  in  the  heavens  recorded  in  the  annals  of  the  nation. 

Vast  was  the  progress  of  knowledge  during  the 
interval  between  these  empires  and  the  century  in 
which  modern  science  began.  Yet,  if  I  am  right  in 
making  a  distinction  between  the  slow  and  regular 
steps  of  progress,  each  growing  naturally  out  of  that 
which  preceded  it,  and  the  entrance  of  the  mind  at 
some  fairly  definite  epoch  into  an  entirely  new  sphere 
of  activity,  it  would  appear  that  there  was  only  one 

"9 


such  epoch  during  the  entire  interval.  This  was  when 
abstract  geometrical  reasoning  commenced,  and  astro- 
nomical observations  aiming  at  precision  were  recorded, 
compared  and  discussed.  Closely  associated  with  it 
must  have  been  the  construction  of  the  forms  of  logic. 
The  radical  difference  between  the  demonstration  of  a 
theorem  of  geometry  and  the  reasoning  of  everyday 
life  which  the  masses  of  men  must  have  practiced  from 
the  beginning,  and  which  few  even  today  ever  get 
beyond,  is  so  evident  at  a  glance  that  I  need  not  dwell 
upon  it.  The  principal  feature  of  this  advance  is  that, 
by  one  of  those  antinomies  of  the  human  intellect  of 
which  examples  are  not  wanting  even  in  our  own  time, 
the  development  of  abstract  ideas  preceded  the  concrete 
knowledge  of  natural  phenomena.  When  we  reflect 
that  in  the  geometry  of  Euclid  the  science  of  space  was 
brought  to  such  logical  perfection  that  even  today  its 
teachers  are  not  agreed  as  to  the  practicability  of  any 
great  improvement  upon  it,  we  cannot  avoid  the  feeling 
that  a  very  slight  change  in  the  direction  of  the  intel- 
lectual activity  of  the  Greeks  would  have  led  to  the 
beginning  of  natural  science.  But  it  would  seem  that 
the  very  purity  and  perfection  which  was  aimed  at  in 
their  system  of  geometry  stood  in  the  way  of  any 
extension  or  application  of  its  methods  and  spirit  to 
the  field  of  nature.  One  example  of  this  is  worthy  of 
attention.  In  modern  teaching  the  idea  of  magnitude 
as  generated  by  motion  is  freely  introduced.  A  line  is 
described  by  a  moving  point ;  a  plane  by  a  moving 
line ;  a  solid  by  a  moving  plane.  It  may,  at  first  sight, 
seem  singular  that  this  conception  finds  no  place  in  the 
Euclidian  system.  But  we  may  regard  the  omission 

10 


as  a  mark  of  logical  purity  and  rigor.  Had  the  real  or 
supposed  advantages  of  introducing  motion  into  geo- 
metrical conceptions  been  suggested  to  Euclid,  we  may 
suppose  him  to  have  replied  that  the  theorems  of  space 
are  independent  of  time ;  that  the  idea  of  motion  neces- 
sarily implies  time,  and  that,  in  consequence,  to  avail 
ourselves  of  it  would  be  to  introduce  an  extraneous 
element  into  geometry. 

It  is  quite  possible  that  the  contempt  of  the  ancient 
philosophers  for  the  practical  application  of  their  science, 
which  has  continued  in  some  form  to  our  own  time, 
and  which  is  not  altogether  unwholesome,  was  a  pow- 
erful factor  in  the  same  direction.  The  result  was  that, 
in  keeping  geometry  pure  from  ideas  which  did  not 
belong  to  it,  it  failed  to  form  what  might  otherwise  have 
been  the  basis  of  physical  science.  Its  founders  missed 
the  discovery  that  methods  similar  to  those  of  geometric 
demonstration  could  be  extended  into  other  and  wider 
fields  than  that  of  space.  Thus  not  only  the  develop- 
ment of  applied  geometry  but  the  reduction  of  other 
conceptions  to  a  rigorous  mathematical  form  was  indefi- 
nitely postponed. 

Astronomy  is  necessarily  a  science  of  observation 
pure  and  simple,  in  which  experiment  can  have  no  place 
except  as  an  auxiliary.  The  vague  accounts  of  striking 
celestial  phenomena  handed  down  by  the  priests  and 
astrologers  of  antiquity  were  followed  in  the  time  of  the 
Greeks  by  observations  having,  in  form  at  least,  a  rude 
approach  to  precision,  though  nothing  like  the  degree  of 
precision  that  the  astronomer  of  today  would  reach  with 
the  naked  eye,  aided  by  such  instruments  as  he  could 
fashion  from  the  tools  at  the  command  of  the  ancients. 

IT 


The   rude  observations   commenced  by  the  Baby- 
lonians   were    continued    with    gradually    improving 
instruments— first  by    the    Greeks    and   afterward   by 
the  Arabs — but  the  results  failed  to  afford  any  insight 
into   the  true  relation  of  the  earth  to    the   heavens. 
What  was  most  remarkable  in  this  failure  is  that,  to 
take  a  first  step  forward  which  would  have  led  on  to 
success,  no  more  was  necessary  than  a  course  of  abstract 
thinking  vastly  easier  than  that  required  for  working 
out  the  problems  of  geometry.     That  space  is  infinite 
is  an  unexpressed  axiom,  tacitly  assumed  by  Euclid 
and  his    successors.     Combining   this  with    the   most 
elementary  consideration  of  the  properties  of  the  tri- 
angle, it  would  be  seen  that  a  body  of  any  given  size 
could  be  placed  at  such  a  distance  in  space  as  to  appear 
to  us  like  a  point.      Hence  a  body  as   large    as   our 
earth,  which  was  known  to  be  a  globe  from  the  time 
that  the  ancient  Phoenicians  navigated   the    Mediter- 
ranean, if  placed  in  the  heavens  at  a  sufficient  distance, 
would  look  like   a  star.     The  obvious  conclusion  that 
the  stars  might  be  bodies  like  our  globe,  shining  either 
by  their  own  light  or  by  that  of  the  sun,  would  have 
been    a   first    step    to    the    understanding   of  the  true 
system  of  the  world. 

There  is  historic  evidence  that  this  deduction  did 
not  wholly  escape  the  Greek  thinkers.  It  is  true  that 
the  critical  student  will  assign  little  weight  to  the  cur- 
rent belief  that  the  vague  theory  of  Pythagoras — that 
fire  was  at  the  centre  of  all  things — implies  a  concep- 
tion of  the  heliocentric  theory  of  the  solar  system.  But 
the  testimony  of  Archimedes,  confused  though  it  is  in 
form,  leaves  no  serious  doubt  that  Aristarchus  of  Samos 


not  only  propounded  the  view  that  the  earth  revolves 
both  on  its  own  axis  and  around  the  sun,  but  that  ,he 
correctly  removed  the  great  stumbling-block  in  the  way 
of  this  theory  by  adding  that  the  distance  of  the  fixed 
stars  was  infinitely  greater  than  the  dimensions  of  the 
earth's  orbit.  Even  the  world  of  philosophy  was  not 
yet  ready  for  this  conception,  and,  so  far  from  seeing 
the  reasonableness  of  the  explanation,  we  find  Ptolemy 
arguing  against  the  rotation  of  the  earth  on  grounds 
which  careful  observations  of  the  phenomena  around 
him  would  have  shown  to  be  ill-founded. 

Physical  science,  if  we  can  apply  that  term  to  an 
unco-ordinated  body  of  facts,  was  successfully  culti- 
vated from  the  earliest  times.  Something  must  have 
been  known  of  the  properties  of  metals,  and  the  art 
of  extracting  them  from  their  ores  must  have  been 
practiced,  from  the  time  that  coins  and  medals  were  first 
stamped.  The  properties  of  the  most  common  com- 
pounds were  discovered  by  alchemists  in  their  vain 
search  for  the  philosopher's  stone,  but  no  actual  progress 
worthy  of  the  name  rewarded  the  practitioners  of  the 
black  art. 

Perhaps  the  first  approach  to  a  correct  method  was 
that  of  *  Archimedes,  who  by  much  thinking  worked 
out  the  law  of  the  lever,  reached  the  conception  of  the 
centre  of  gravity,  and  demonstrated  the  first  principles 
of  hydrostatics.  It  is  remarkable  that  he  did  .  not 
extend  his  researches  into  the  phenomena  of  motion, 
whether  spontaneous  or  produced  by  force.  The  sta- 
tionary condition  of  the  human  intellect  is  most  strik- 
ingly illustrated  by  the  fact  that  not  until  the  time  of 
Leonardo  was  any  substantial  advance  made  on  his 

13 


discovery.  To  sum  up  in  one  sentence  the  most  char- 
acteristic feature  of  ancient  and  medieval  science,  we 
see  a  notable  contrast  between  the  precision  of  thought 
implied  in  the  construction  and  demonstration  of  geo- 
metrical theorems  and  the  vague  indefinite  character 
of  the  ideas  of  natural  phenomena  generally,  a  contrast 
which  did  not  disappear  until  the  foundations  of  modern 
science  began  to  be  laid. 

We  should  miss  the  most  essential  point  of  the 
difference  between  medieval  and  modern  learning  if  we 
looked  upon  it  as  mainly  a  difference  either  in  the  pre- 
cision or  the  amount  of  knowledge.  The  development 
of  both  of  these  qualities  would,  under  any  circum- 
stances, have  been  slow  and  gradual,  but  sure.  We 
can  hardly  suppose  that  any  one  generation,  or  even 
any  one  century,  would  have  seen  the  complete  substitu- 
tion of  exact  for  inexact  ideas.  Slowness  of  growth  is 
as  inevitable  in  the  case  of  knowledge  as  in  that  of  a 
growing  organism.  The  most  essential  point  of  differ- 
ence is  one  of  those  seemingly  slight  ones,  the  impor- 
tance of  which  we  are  too  apt  to  overlook.  It  was  like 
the  drop  of  blood  in  the  wrong  place,  which  some  one 
has  told  us  makes  all  the  difference  between  a  philos- 
opher and  a  maniac.  It  was  all  the  difference  between 
a  living  tree  and  a  dead  one,  between  an  inert  mass  and 
a  growing  organism.  The  transition  of  knowledge 
from  the  dead  to  the  living  form  must,  in  any  complete 
review  of  the  subject,  be  looked  upon  as  the  really 
great  event  of  modern  times.  Before  this  event  the 
intellect  was  bound  down  by  a  scholasticism  which 
regarded  knowledge  as  a  rounded  whole,  the  parts  of 
which  were  written  in  books  and  carried  in  the  minds 

14 


of  learned  men.  The  student  was  taught  from  the 
beginning  of  his  work  to  look  upon  authority  as  the 
foundation  of  his  beliefs.  The  older  the  authority  the 
greater  the  weight  it  carried.  So  effective  was  this 
teaching  that  it  seems  never  to  have  occurred  to  indi- 
vidual men  that  they  had  all  the  opportunities  ever 
enjoyed  by  Aristotle  of  discovering  truth,  with  the 
added  advantage  of  all  his  knowledge  to  begin  with. 
Advanced  as  was  the  development  of  formal  logic,  that 
practical  logic  was  wanting  which  could  see  that  the 
last  of  a  series  of  authorities,  every  one  of  which 
rested  on  those  which  preceded  il,  could  never  form  a 
surer  foundation  for  any  doctrine  than  that  supplied 
by  its  original  propounder. 

The  result  of  this  view  of  knowledge  was  that, 
although  during  the  fifteen  centuries  following  the  death 
of  the  geometer  of  Syracuse  great  universities  were 
founded  at  which  generations  of  professors  expounded 
all  the  learning  of  their  time,  neither  professor  nor 
student  ever  suspected  what  latent  possibilities  of  good 
were  concealed  in  the  most  familiar  operations  of  nature. 
Every  one  felt  the  wind  blow,  saw  water  boil  and  heard 
the  thunder  crash,  but  never  thought  of  investigating 
the  forces  here  at  play.  Up  to  the  middle  of  the  fif- 
teenth century  the  most  acute  observer  could  scarcely 
have  seen  the  dawn  of  a  new  era. 

In  view  of  this  state  of  things  it  must  be  regarded 
as  one  of  the  most  remarkable  facts  in  evolutionary 
history  that  four  or  five  men,  whose  mental  constitution 
was  either  typical  of  the  new  order  of  things  or  who 
were  powerful  agents  in  bringing  it  about,  were  all 

15 


born  during  the  fifteenth  century,  four  of  them  at  least 
at  so  nearly  the  same  time  as  to  be  contemporaries. 

Leonardo  da  Vinci,  whose  artistic  genius  has 
charmed  succeeeding  generations,  was  also  the  first 
practical  engineer  of  his  time,  and  the  first  man  after 
Archimedes  to  make  a  substantial  advance  in  develop- 
ing the  laws  of  motion.  That  the  world  was  not  pre- 
pared to  make  use  of  his  scientific  discoveries  does  not 
detract  from  the  significance  which  must  attach  to  the 
period  of  his  birth. 

Shortly  after  him  was  born  the  great  navigator 
whose  bold  spirit  was  to  make  known  a  new  world,  thus 
giving  to  commercial  enterprise  that  impetus  which 
was  so  powerful  an  agent  in  bringing  about  a  revolution 
in  the  thoughts  of  men. 

The  birth  of  Columbus  was  soon  followed  by 
that  of  Copernicus,  the  first  after  Aristarchus  to  dem- 
onstrate the  true  system  of  the  world.  In  him  more 
than  in  any  of  his  contemporaries  do  we  see  the 
struggle  between  the  old  forms  of  thought  and  the 
new.  It  seems  almost  pathetic  and  is  certainly  most 
suggestive  of  the  general  view  of  knowledge  taken  at 
that  time  that,  instead  of  claiming  credit  for  bringing 
to  light  great  truths  before  unknown,  he  made  a 
labored  attempt  to  show  that,  after  all,  there  was  noth- 
ing really  new  in  his  system,  which  he  claimed  to  date 
from  Pythagoras  and  Philolaus.  In  this  connection  it 
is  curious  that  he  makes  no  mention  of  Aristarchus, 
who  I  think  will  be  regarded  by  conservative  historians 
as  his  only  demonstrated  predecessor.  To  the  hold  of 
the  older  ideas  upon  his  mind  we  must  attribute  the 
fact  that  in  constructing  his  system  he  took  great  pains 

16 


to  make  as  little  change  as  possible  in  ancient 
conceptions. 

Luther,  the  greatest  thought-stirrer  of  them  all, 
practically  of  the  same  generation  with  Copernicns, 
Leonardo  and  Colnmbus,  does  not  come  in  as  a  scien- 
tific investigator,  bnt  as  the  great  loosener  of  chains 
which  had  so  fettered  the  intellect  of  men  that  they 
dared  not  think  otherwise  than  as  the  authorities  thought. 

Almost  coeval  with  the  advent  of  these  intellects 
was  the  invention  of  printing  with  movable  type. 
Gutenberg  was  born  during  the  first  decade  of  the 
century,  and  his  associates  and  others  credited  with 
the  invention  not  many  years  afterward.  If  we 
accept  the  principle  on  which  I  am  basing  my  argu- 
ment, that  we  should  assign  the  first  place  to  the  birth 
of  those  psychic  agencies  which  started  men  on  new 
lines  of  thought,  then  surely  was  the  fifteenth  the  won- 
derful century. 

Let  us  not  forget  that,  in  assigning  the  actors  then 
born  to  their  places,  we  are  not  narrating  history,  but 
studying  a  special  phase  of  evolution.  It  matters  not 
for  us  that  no  university  invited  Leonardo  to  its  halls, 
and  that  his  science  was  valued  by  his  contemporaries 
only  as  an  adjunct  to  the  art  of  engineering.  The 
great  fact  still  is  that  he  was  the  first  of  mankind  to 
propound  laws  of  motion.  It  is  not  for  anything  in 
Luther's  doctrines  that  he  finds  a  place  in  our  scheme. 
No  matter  for  us  whether  they  were  sound  or  not. 
What  he  did  toward  the  evolution  of  the  scientific 
investigator  was  to  show  by  his  example  that  a  man 
might  question  the  best-established  and  most  venerable 
authority  and  still  live — still  preserve  his  intellectual 

17 


integrity — still  command  a  hearing  from  nations  and 
their  rulers.  It  matters  not  for  us  whether  Columbus 
ever  knew  that  he  had  discovered  a  new  continent. 
His  work  was  to  teach  that  neither  hydra,  chimera 
nor  abyss — neither  divine  injunction  nor  infernal 
machination — was  in  the  way  of  men  visiting  every 
part  of  the  globe,  and  that  the  problem  of  conquering 
the  world  reduced  itself  to  one  of  sails  and  rigging, 
hull  and  compass.  The  better  part  of  Copernicus  was 
to  direct  man  to  a  viewpoint  whence  he  should  see  that 
the  heavens  were  of  like  matter  with  the  earth.  All 
this  done,  the  acorn  was  planted  from  which  the  oak 
of  our  civilization  should  spring.  The  mad  quest  for 
gold  which  followed  the  discovery  of  Columbus,  the 
questionings  which  absorbed  the  attention  of  the 
learned,  the  indignation  excited  by  the'  seeming 
vagaries  of  a  Parcelsus,  the  fear  and  trembling  lest 
the  strange  doctrine  of  Copernicus  should  undermine 
the  faith  of  centuries,  were  all  helps  to  the  germina- 
tion of  the  seed — stimuli  to  thought  which  urged  it 
on  to  explore  the  new  fields  opened  up  to  its  occupa- 
tion. This  given,  all  that  has  since  followed  came  out 
in  regular  order  of  development,  and  need  be  here 
considered  only  in  those  phases  having  a  special  rela- 
tion to  the  purpose  of  our  present  meeting. 

So  slow  was  the  growth  at  first  that  the  sixteenth 
century  may  scarcely  have  recognized  the  inauguration 
of  a  new  era.  Torricelli  and  Benedetti  were  of  the  third 
generation  after  Leonardo,  and  Galileo,  the  first  to  make 
a  substantial  advance  upon  his  theory,  was  born  more 
than  a  century  after  him.  Only  two  or  three  men 
appeared  in  a  generation  who,  working  alone,  could 

18 


make  real  progress  in  discovery,  and  even  these  could 
do  little  in  leavening  the  minds  of  their  fellowmen  with 
the  new  ideas. 

Up  to  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  an 
agent  which  all  experience  since  that  time  shows  to  be 
necessary  to  the  most  productive  intellectual  activity 
was  wanting.  This  was  the  attraction  of  like  minds, 
making  suggestions  to  each  other,  criticising,  compar- 
ing and  reasoning.  This  element  was  introduced  by 
the  organization  of  the  Royal  Society  of  London  and 
the  Academy  of  Sciences  of  Paris. 

The  members  of  these  two  bodies  seem  like  ingenious 
youth  suddenly  thrown  into  a  new  world  of  interesting 
objects,  the  purposes  and  relations  of  which  they  had  to 
discover.  The  novelty  of  the  situation  is  strikingly 
shown  in  the  questions  which  occupied  the  minds  of 
the  incipient  investigators.  One  natural  result  of 
British  maritime  enterprise  was  that  the  aspirations  of 
the  Fellows  of  the  Royal  Society  were  not  confined  to 
any  continent  or  hemisphere.  Inquiries  were  sent  all 
the  way  to  Batavia  to  know  "  whether  there  be  a  hill  in 
vSumatra  which  burneth  continually,  and  a  fountain 
which  runneth  pure  balsam. n  The  astronomical  pre- 
cision with  which  it  seemed  possible  that  physiological 
operations  might  go  on  was  evinced  by  the  inquiry 
whether  the  Indians  can  so  prepare  that  stupefying 
herb  Datura  that  "they  make  it  lie  several  days, 
months,  years,  according  as  they  will,  in  a  man's  body 
without  doing  him  any  harm,  and  at  the  end  kill  him 
without  missing  an  hour's  time."  Of  this  continent 
one  of  the  inquiries  was  whether  there  be  a  tree  in 


Mexico  that  yields  water,  wine,  vinegar,  milk,  honey, 
wax,  thread  and  needles. 

Among  the  problems  before  the  Paris  Academy  of 
Sciences  those  of  physiology  and  biology  took  a  promi- 
nent place.  The  distillation  of  compounds  had  long 
been  practiced,  and  the  fact  that  the  more  spirituous 
elements  of  certain  substances  were  thus  separated 
naturally  led  to  the  question  whether  the  essential 
essences  of  life  might  not  be  discoverable  in  the  same 
way.  In  order  that  all  might  participate  in  the  experi- 
ments, they  were  conducted  in  open  session  of  the 
Academy,  thus  guarding  against  the  danger  of  any  one 
member  obtaining  for  his  exclusive  personal  use  a  pos- 
sible elixir  of  life.  A  wide  range  of  the  animal  and 
vegetable  kingdom,  including  cats,  dogs  and  birds  of 
various  species,  were  thus  analyzed.  The  practice  of 
dissection  was  introduced  on  a  large  scale.  That  of  the 
cadaver  of  an  elephant  occupied  several  sessions,  and 
was  of  such  interest  that  the  monarch  himself  was  a 
spectator. 

To  the  same  epoch  with  the  formation  and  first 
work  of  these  two  bodies  belongs  the  invention  of  a 
mathematical  method  which  in  its  importance  to  the 
advance  of  exact  science  may  be  classed  with  the 
invention  of  the  alphabet  in  its  relation  to  the  progress 
of  society  at  large.  The  use  of  algebraic  symbols  to 
represent  quantities  had  its  origin  before  the  commence- 
ment of  the  new  era,  and  gradually  grew  into  a  highly 
developed  form  during  the  first  two  centuries  of  that  era. 
But  this  method  could  represent  quantities  only  as  fixed. 
It  is  true  that  the  elasticity  inherent  in  the  use  of  such 
symbols  permitted  of  their  being  applied  to  any  and 

20 


every  quantity ;  yet,  in  any  one  application,  the  quan- 
tity was  considered  as  fixed  and  definite.  But  most  of 
the  magnitudes  of  nature  are  in  a  state  of  continual 
variation;  indeed,  since  all  motion  is  variation,  thf 
latter  is  a  universal  characteristic  of  all  phenomena. 
No  serious  advance  could  be  made  in  the  application  of 
algebraic  language  to  the  expression  of  physical  phe- 
nomena until  it  could  be  so  extended  as  to  express  varia- 
tion in  quantities,  as  well  as  the  quantities  themselves. 
This  extension,  worked  out  independently  by  Newton 
and  Leibnitz,  may  be  classed  as  the  most  fruitful  of 
conceptions  in  exact  science.  With  it  the  way  was 
opened  for  the  unimpeded  and  continually  accelerated 
progress  of  the  last  two  centuries. 

The  feature  of  this  period  which  has  the  closest 
relation  to  the  purpose  of  our  coming  together  is  the 
seemingly  unending  subdivision  of  knowledge  into 
specialties,  many  of  which  are  becoming  so  minute 
and  so  isolated  that  they  seem  to  have  no  interest  for 
any  but  their  few  pursuers.  Happily  science  itself 
has  afforded  a  corrective  for  its  own  tendency  in  this 
direction.  The  careful  thinker  will  see  that  in  these 
seemingly  diverging  branches  common  elements  and 
common  principles  are  corning  more  and  more  to  light. 
There  is  an  increasing  recognition  of  methods  of 
research,  and  of  deduction,  which  are  common  to  large 
branches,  or  to  the  whole  of  science.  We  are  more 
and  more  recognizing  the  principle  that  progress  in 
knowledge  implies  its  reduction  to  more  exact  forms, 
and  the  expression  of  its  ideas  in  language  more  or 
less  mathematical.  The  problem  before  the  organizers 
of  this  Congress  was,  therefore,  to  bring  the  sciences 

21 


together,    and   seek    for    the    unity    which    we   believe 
underlies  their  infinite  diversity. 

The  assembling  of  such  a  body  as  now  fills  this 
hall  was  scarcely  possible  in  any  preceding  generation, 
and  is  made  possible  now  only  through  the  agency  of 
science  itself.  It  differs  from  all  preceding  inter- 
national meetings  by  the  universality  of  its  scope, 
which  aims  to  include  the  whole  of  knowledge.  It  is 
also  unique  in  that  none  but  leaders  have  been  sought 
out  as  members.  It  is  unique  in  that  so  many  lands 
have  delegated  their  choicest  intellects  to  carry  on  its 
work.  They  come  from  the  country  to  which  our 
republic  is  indebted  for  a  third  of  its  territory,  includ- 
ing the  ground  on  which  we  stand  ;  from  the  land  which 
has  taught  us  that  the  most  scholarly  devotion  to  the 
languages  and  learning  of  the  cloistered  past  is  com- 
patible with  leadership  in  the  practical  application  of 
modern  science  to  the  arts  of  life  ;  from  the  island  whose 
language  and  literature  have  found  a  new  field  and  a 
vigorous  growth  in  this  region  ;  from  the  last  seat  of  the 
holy  Roman  Empire;  from  the  country  which,  remem- 
bering a  monarch  who  made  an  astronomical  obser- 
vation at  the  Greenwich  Observatory,  has  enthroned 
science  in  one  of  the  highest  places  in  its  government ; 
from  the  peninsula  so  learned  that  we  have  invited  one 
of  its  scholars  to  come  and  tell  us  of  our  own  language ; 
from  the  land  which  gave  birth  to  Leonardo,  Galileo, 
Torricelli,  Columbus,  Volta — what  an  array  of  immortal 
names !  —  from  the  little  republic  of  glorious  history 
which,  breeding  men  rugged  as  its  eternal  snow-peaks, 
has  yet  been  the  seat  of  scientific  investigation  since 
the  day  of  the  Bernoulli s ;  from  the  land  whose  heroic 


22 


dwellers  did  not  Hesitate  to  use  the  ocean  itself  to  pro- 
tect it  against  invaders,  and  which  now  makes  us 
marvel  at  the  amount  of  erudition  compressed  within 
its  little  area ;  from  the  nation  across  the  Pacific,  which, 
by  half  a  century  of  unequaled  progress  in  the  arts  of 
life,  has  made  an  important  contribution  to  evolution- 
ary science  through  demonstrating  the  falsity  of  the 
theory  that  the  most  ancient  races  are  doomed  to  be 
left  in  the  rear  of  the  advancing  age — in  a  word,  from 
every  great  center  of  intellectual  activity  on  the  globe 
I  see  before  me  eminent  representatives  of  that  world- 
advance  in  knowledge  which  we  have  met  to  celebrate. 
May  we  not  confidently  hope  that  the  discussions  of 
such  an  assemblage  will  prove  pregnant  of  a  future  for 
science  which  shall  outshine  even  its  brilliant  past. 

Gentlemen  and  scholars  all !  You  do  not  visit 
our  shores  to  find  great  collections  in  which  centuries 
of  humanity  have  given  expression  on  canvas  and  in 
marble  to  their  hopes,  fears  and  aspirations.  Nor  do 
you  expect  institutions  and  buildings  hoary  with  age. 
But  as  you  feel  the  vigor  latent  in  the  fresh  air  of 
these  expansive  prairies,  which  has  collected  the 
products  of  human  genius  by  which  we  are  here  sur- 
rounded, and,  I  may  add,  brought  us  together;  as  you 
study  the  institutions  which  we  have  founded  for  the 
benefit,  not  only  of  our  own  people,  but  of  humanity  at 
large;  as  you  meet  the  men  who,  in  the  short  space  of 
one  century,  have  transformed  this  valley  from  a 
savage  wilderness  into  what  it  is  today — then  may  you 
find  compensation  for  the  want  of  a  past  like  yours  by 
seeing  with  prophetic  eye  a  future  world-power  of  which 
this  region  shall  be  the  seat.  If  such  is  to  be  the 

23 


outcome  of  the  institutions  which  we  are  now  building 
up,  then  may  your  present  visit  be  a  blessing  both  to 
your  posterity  and  ours  by  making  that  power  one  for 
good  to  all  mankind.  Your  deliberations  will  help  to 
demonstrate  to  us  and  to  the  world  at  large  that  the 
reign  of  law  must  supplant  that  of  brute  force  in  the 
relations  of  the  nations,  just  as  it  has  supplanted  it  in 
the  relations  of  individuals.  You  will  help  to  show 
that  the  war  which  science  is  now  waging  against  the 
sources  of  diseases,  pain  and  misery  offers  an  even 
nobler  field  for  the  exercise  of  heroic  qualities  than  can 
that  of  battle.  We  hope  that  when,  after  your  all  too- 
fleeting  sojourn  in  our  midst,  you  return  to  your  own 
shores,  you  will  long  feel  the  influence  of  the  new  air 
you  have  breathed  in  an  infusion  of  increased  vigor  in 
pursuing  your  varied  labors.  And  if  a  new  impetus 
is  thus  given  to  the  great  intellectual  movement  of  the 
past  century,  resulting  not  only  in  promoting  the  uni- 
fication of  knowledge,  but  in  widening  its  field  through 
new  combinations  of  effort  on  the  part  of  its  votaries, 
the  projectors,  organizers  and  supporters  of  this  Con- 
gress of  Arts  and  Science  will  be  justified  of  their 
labors. 


24 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 
LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


5APR'59CB 


REC'D  LD 


HAY  3  1  iS59| 

jpl5i®& 

TO.  DISC. 

MAY  2  4  i^89 

CIRCULATION 

| 

LD  2lA-50m-9,'58 
(6889slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  Californiz 

Berkeley 


U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


